Inside Defense
Nov. 6, 2009 -- Government Accountability Office auditors recently told lawmakers they believe the Defense Department lacks contingency plans for the drawdown of forces from Iraq, as they would be required by U.S. military doctrine, InsideDefense.com has learned.
Senate Armed Services Committee staff recorded Oct. 2 as the receipt date of the secret September GAO assessment, according to public panel records. The report is titled “United States Drawdown Plans Should Include Contingency Plan For Use If Key Assumptions About Security Conditions and Iraqi Capabilities Prove Wrong,” and it is part of GAO's “Securing and Stabilizing Iraq” audit series, according to those records.
House Armed Services Committee members also are aware of the document. “The committee works very closely with the GAO, and had knowledge of the report” when panelists questioned senior defense officials during an Oct. 21 hearing about DOD's Iraq drawdown plans, a spokesman for the panel's top Republican, Rep. Howard McKeon (R-CA), wrote in an e-mail last week.
“Do we have contingency plans in the event the security situation demands revisiting the August 2010 time line?” McKeon asked witnesses, including DOD policy chief Michèle Flournoy, in his opening statement.
President Obama announced a plan to redeploy all combat troops from the country by August of next year. The move entails removing roughly 80,000 personnel from the country, leaving a force of 50,000 in place.
Defense officials have said they will use “decision points” as the coming months unfold in the still-volatile country to determine whether the redeployment pace should be kept or altered.
Sources said therein lies the crux of auditors' findings -- that periodic strategy evaluations alone cannot replace long-term contingency plans considering a wide range of worst-case scenarios. For example, the decision point strategy could leave little time to reconcile a potentially sudden need for more forces with already scheduled troop rotations, the argument goes.
In a statement, a Pentagon spokesman did not specifically address GAO's charge. “[W]e have always said that our drawdown plan retains some flexibility to deal with [the] changing situation on the ground,” Marine Corps Maj. Shawn Turner wrote in an e-mail. “We have decision points along the way that will allow us to adjust to a wide range of changes in the security environment. Going forward, we will continue to assess and adjust as necessary.”
A GAO official last week told InsideDefense.com the report is secret because its assumptions about the Iraqi security environment stem from classified intelligence reports. The classification was ordered by the National Intelligence Council, the official said, noting GAO has no authority to classify records. The council, an arm of the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, and DOD provided comments on the report, the official said.
Auditors have previously raised questions about contingency plans in Iraq. A March GAO report outlining topics for congressional oversight asked what U.S. plans would be if Iraqis voted against a November 2008 status-of-forces agreement governing the presence of American forces in Iraq until the end of 2011. Such a development could significantly hasten the redeployment, according to the March report.
Lawmakers have said the country's national election, envisioned for January 2010, and the possibility of increased violence thereafter is a crucial factor for the pace of the redeployment.
“Given all that is at stake in the upcoming elections and that the drivers of instability continue to threaten Iraqi security, I am concerned that your redeployment schedule is too aggressive,” McKeon wrote in a Nov. 4 letter to President Obama. “Moreover, if Iraq's national elections slip past January 2010, I believe the August 31, 2010 redeployment deadline offers [Multinational Force-Iraq Commander Army Gen. Raymond Odierno] little room to maneuver,” the letter states. -- Sebastian Sprenger, with additional reporting by Kate Brannen
1162009_nov6b